Return-path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:07:50 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PThWO-0006sM-LB; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:07:24 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PThVp-0006sG-G3 for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:49 -0800 Received: from mail-yw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.213.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PThVk-0006s1-BI for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:49 -0800 Received: by ywa6 with SMTP id 6so756821ywa.40 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.151.147.8 with SMTP id z8mr3494082ybn.101.1292619998543; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (c-68-35-167-179.hsd1.nm.comcast.net [68.35.167.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r18sm2660698yba.15.2010.12.17.13.06.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:06:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:06:34 -0700 From: ".alyn.post." To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: defining "debug" Message-ID: <20101217210634.GD33333@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org References: <20101217133000.GA32499@alice.local> <20101217203416.GB33333@alice.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 1207 Lines: 34 On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 09:49:02PM +0100, Remo Dentato wrote: > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > > I'd go with (amended): > > > > "s1 searches for flaw(s) s2/c1 in s3/c2 causing c3" > > > > {lo cfisisku} is merely an agent that searches for imperfections - a > > mechanic is a {lo karce cfisisku}, for instance.> > > So, could it also be used for "diagnose"? I would like that! > That's really compelling. I wonder if one would diagnose without necessarily looking for a flaw? Jumping over to wikipedia gives me "Diagnosis is the identification of the nature and cause of anything." (Which doesn't fit so well) but later says "diagnosis is typically used to determine the causes of symptoms, mitigations for problems, and solutions to issues." I have a cat on my lap, preventing me from getting my OED, which would of course be much clearer and authoritative on the breadth by which people use the English word diagnose. Recall an earlier part of this thread where Alaric suggested it would be useful to separate testing/investigation from fixing. That affects where we would put diagnosis in this concept space. -Alan -- .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi